Skip to main content

About your Search

20130113
20130121
STATION
CSPAN2 2
LANGUAGE
Search Results 0 to 1 of about 2
CSPAN
Jan 14, 2013 8:00am EST
-- >> guest: well, here's some other examples. let's take corporate tax. it seems likely that there'll be a yearlong debate about corporate taxation here in washington in the year 2013. most businesses are global in some respect now. not all, but most big businesses for sure. if you're a big business and you look over to china, you'll see in their five-year plans in energy or in information technology specific promises to have a 15% corporate income tax rate. you come to the united states, you have no predictability, you don't know what it is, and the current rate is much, much higher than that. we need reforms that say to businesses we want you to invest here in the united states. while we're having this big debate about corporate tax reform, let's include in it specific reforms for the energy sector that, in fact be, are designed to attract a massive amount of new investment to build a clean energy platform. let's have that be a subpart of the corporate tax reform debate. another example, the carbon tax. the carbon tax is a prod-based -- broad-based tax that does not, in fact, hav
CSPAN
Jan 14, 2013 8:00pm EST
in a way that they tax dollars are used efficiently and effectively. i'm offering three amends which i think capture the spirit of doing this appropriately to help the devastated communities rebuild stronger and safer, while protecting the taxpayers. first, congressman campbell and i have submitted amendment number 29 that would clarify the language in the amendment about the nonfederal share for ongoing construction projects unrelated to hurricane sandy. now, historically, each renourishment is controversial. how much should we invest in this, and we have settled on a split. 65% federal, 35% state and local or private. we raised that. that's unprecedented. but so be it. may be unprecedented circumstance. but the language in the amendment does not make it clear that we're -- that this is a one-time only shot. projects like this, for long-term beach construction, can last up to 50 years. and i think it would be a great mistake if somehow there's ambiguity in this law that would put the federal taxpayer on the hook for decades to come. i hope it's a drafting error, but i would hope that
Search Results 0 to 1 of about 2